BAPTISM SAVES, FOR THE REMISSION OF SINS"

[ScottA]

In the Eucharist, the bread and wine is transformed into His body and blood - while still under the appearance of bread and wine. This is how Jesus showed the Apostles how to consume His body and blood SACRAMENTALLY at the Last Supper.

He didn't hold out His arm for each of them to take a bite. He showed them that through the blessing and breaking of the bread, it would be transformed into His flesh and blood.

THIS is why He told the Apostles, "This IS my body" and "This IS my blood" - and not merely pious "symbols" of it.

THIS is why Jesus told the crowd in John 6:53, “Amen, amen, I say to you, unless you eat the FLESH of the Son of Man and drink his BLOOD, you do not have life within you."

THIS is why Ignatius of Antioch, student of the Apostle John said of the heretics: They abstain from the Eucharist and from prayer because they do not confess that the Eucharist is the flesh of our Savior Jesus Christ, flesh which suffered for our sins and which that Father, in his goodness, raised up again (Letter to the Smyrnaeans 6:2-7:1 [A.D. 110]).

THIS is why Augustine stated, "That bread which you see on the altar having been sanctified by the word of God IS the body of Christ, That chalice, or rather, what is in that chalice, having been sanctified by the word of God, IS the blood of Christ" (Sermons 227 [A.D. 411]).

THIS is why EVERY SINGLE Early Church Father UNANIMOUSLY preached on the Real Presence of the Eucharist - without exception.
Was EVERYBODY wrong until John Calvin came along some 1500 years later and set everybody "straight" on the matter - including Luther? Is that what you're saying??

If that's the case - then ALL of the Early Church Fathers, ALL of the Christians who were martyred by the Romans - ALL practicing Christians for 1500 years - including some of the Reformers like Luther are in HELL for idolatry.

Is that what you're saying??

Just as I thought.

Here you list the errors of the church and "the blind leaders of the blind" as your defense for doing the same. But no, people don't necessarily go to hell for being blind to the spiritual truth, or when "they know not what they do."

 

[BreadOfLife]

Just as I thought.

Here you list the errors of the church and "the blind leaders of the blind" as your defense for doing the same. But no, people don't necessarily go to hell for being blind to the spiritual truth, or when "they know not what they do."

The leaders and the teachers are different - and more culpable . . .
James 3:1
Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

Matt. 15:14
Leave them; they are blind guides. If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit."

Luke 12:48
From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required.

Heb 13:17
Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.

Mark 9:42
"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.

According to YOU - the Early Church Fathers - MOST of whom were Bishops are ALL guilty of leading millions to idolatry for their teachings on the Real Presence in the Eucharist. Your logic dictates that Martin Luther and some of the Reformers are ALSO in Hell for the SAME reason.

 

[ScottA]

The leaders and the teachers are different - and more culpable . . .
James 3:1
Not many of you should become teachers, my fellow believers, because you know that we who teach will be judged more strictly.

Matt. 15:14
Leave them; they are blind guides. If the blind lead the blind, both will fall into a pit."

Luke 12:48
From everyone to whom much has been given, much will be required.

Heb 13:17
Obey your leaders and submit to them, for they are keeping watch over your souls, as those who will have to give an account.

Mark 9:42
"If anyone causes one of these little ones--those who believe in me--to stumble, it would be better for them if a large millstone were hung around their neck and they were thrown into the sea.

According to YOU - the Early Church Fathers - MOST of whom were Bishops are ALL guilty of leading millions to idolatry for their teachings on the Real Presence in the Eucharist. Your logic dictates that Martin Luther and some of the Reformers are ALSO in Hell for the SAME reason.

I did not say "in Hell", you did. On the contrary, I indicated that Christ was fully prepared to forgive those who "know not what they do."

Nonetheless, most of the church fathers and leaders are indeed guilty. But it is most curious, that after you quote all the scriptures telling you so, you still do not believe that it is even possible that they could be wrong of the very things that are written, just as I have told you is now true.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I did not say "in Hell", you did. On the contrary, I indicated that Christ was fully prepared to forgive those who "know not what they do."

Nonetheless, most of the church fathers and leaders are indeed guilty. But it is most curious, that after you quote all the scriptures telling you so, you still do not believe that it is even possible that they could be wrong of the very things that are written, just as I have told you is now true.

Sooooo - you DON'T believe that Idolators will be punished in HELL?? You believe in Universalism, do you?? The heresy that ALL will be saved??

If somebody is worshiping a piece of bread that is NOT Christ - then they are IDOLATORS. who will have NO part in the kingdom of Heaven (1 Cor.6:9, Rev. 22:15).
If the ECFs, who were mostly bishops were teaching this abomination - they WON'T be able to hide behind invincible ignorance because they are held to a HIGHER standard of judgment than the ones they led "astray" - as I showed you (Matt. 15:14, James 3:1, Luke 12:48, Mark 9:42).

Either the ECFs were RIGHT about the Real Presence and are reaping their rewards for their faithfulness to the Gospel - or they are languishing in HELL for leading millions astray with their doctrines of devils. You can't have it BOTH ways.

You don't seem to know Scripture very well for a person who fancies himself an expert . . .

 

[ScottA]

Sooooo - you DON'T believe that Idolators will be punished in HELL?? You believe in Universalism, do you?? The heresy that ALL will be saved??

If somebody is worshiping a piece of bread that is NOT Christ - then they are IDOLATORS. who will have NO part in the kingdom of Heaven (1 Cor.6:9, Rev. 22:15).
If the ECFs, who were mostly bishops were teaching this abomination - they WON'T be able to hide behind invincible ignorance because they are held to a HIGHER standard of judgment than the ones they led "astray" - as I showed you (Matt. 15:14, James 3:1, Luke 12:48, Mark 9:42).

Either the ECFs were RIGHT about the Real Presence and are reaping their rewards for their faithfulness to the Gospel - or they are languishing in HELL for leading millions astray with their doctrines of devils. You can't have it BOTH ways.

You don't seem to know Scripture very well for a person who fancies himself an expert . . .

So...we both know that idolaters are not getting away with anything. Good.

But there are idolaters, and then there are idolaters - the one is blind, while the other sees. But Christ has come for the "recovery of sight to the blind."

But the point is...the warnings were not just for some, not just for those outside. Yet, you have not taken heed, but have believed well beyond what the scriptures say. Your last defense is the interpretations, teachings, and traditions of fallible men.

 

[epostle]

So...we both know that idolaters are not getting away with anything. Good.

But there are idolaters, and then there are idolaters - the one is blind, while the other sees. But Christ has come for the "recovery of sight to the blind."

But the point is...the warnings were not just for some, not just for those outside. Yet, you have not taken heed, but have believed well beyond what the scriptures say. Your last defense is the interpretations, teachings, and traditions of fallible men.

The Eucharist is either Jesus or Evil
The Eucharist is either Jesus or mere bread and wine.

If the Eucharist is Jesus, everyone should be at Mass, worshipping Our Lord. If the Eucharist is Jesus, there should be no such thing as Protestantism, Mormonism, Islam, atheism, etc. But if the Eucharist isn’t Jesus, then for two thousand years, the would-be followers of Jesus Christ were actually idolaters. If that’s the case, nobody should be Catholic.

So those are the stakes. Everyone who encountered Jesus of Nazareth was faced with a crucial question: is this God, in some mysterious guise, or not? The early Christians called this the “aut Deus aut malus homo” (“either God or a bad man”). Everyone encountering the Eucharist is faced with the same question: either God or idolatry.

And of course, if the Eucharist is pagan idolatry, it’s demonic. As 1 Corinthians 10:20 says, “what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God.”

The whole world hangs on this point: is the Eucharist Jesus or an idol? Is the Sacrifice of the Mass being offered to God, or to demons?

Satan Hates the Eucharist
The satanic Black Mass is a ritual inversion (and mockery) of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass performed by Satanists. Now, there are two types of Satanists: “LaVey Satanists,” and “theological Satanists.” LaVey Satanists atheists who don’t believe in Satan, and use “Satanism” as a tool to harass and provoke Christians (unlike“theological Satanists,” who believe in Satan and worship him). But whether the practitioners are playing at the occult, or serious, there’s no question that they’re tapping into some seriously dark spiritual forces. Satan is at work here.

And it worth pointing out that when Satanists (of both kind) want to mock a religious ritual, you can bet that it’s going to be the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that they target. How often do you hear about Muslim or Hindu or Jewish (or even Protestant) services being subjected to such intense Satanic mockery?

Nor is this Satanic targeting of the Mass anything new. As far back as the fourth century, St. Epiphanius of Salamis described a sect of Gnosticism performing a perverted mockery of Mass. I won’t go into the details, but it was graphic enough that the members of this sect became known as “Borborians” (“filthy ones”).

Satan Doesn’t Drive Out Satan
So the Eucharist is either Jesus or evil (since if it’s not Jesus, it’s idolatry) and since the devil hates the Eucharist, we can cross “evil” off the list.

For some additional Biblical support, consider Matthew 12.22-28:

“Then a blind and dumb demoniac was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the dumb man spoke and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, “Can this be the Son of David?” But when the Pharisees heard it they said, “It is only by Be-el′zebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.”

“Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand; and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Be-el′zebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”

This passage is important: it shows, for example, that Catholic exorcists are operating by the Spirit of God when they drive out demons. But it also means that if Satan hates the Mass, we can be sure that the Mass isn’t evil.

Of course, if the Mass isn’t demonic, if it isn’t idolatry, that really only leaves one option: that the Eucharist is Jesus Christ, and that the Sacrifice of the Mass is presenting Jesus to the Father. This (and as far as I can tell, this alone), accounts for the Satanic mockery.

The Target of Satan
Even if the only thing you knew about Catholicism was that its central form of worship, the Mass, was the target of Satanic ire, you would already have good reason to believe that Catholicism was the true religion.

But taken with all of the other evidence for the truth that the Eucharist is Jesus, that the Mass is a Sacrifice instituted by God, and that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ, Satan is just one more (unwitting) witness for the truth of Jesus Christ and His Church.
How the Satanic Black Mass Proves the Truth of Catholicism | ChurchPOP

But the point is...the warnings were not just for some, not just for those outside. Yet, you have not taken heed, but have believed well beyond what the scriptures say. Your last defense is the interpretations, teachings, and traditions of fallible men.

You think you are mocking BofL "defenses", and you think you are mocking Catholicism. You are not. You are mocking Jesus Christ.

"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Indeed.

 

[ScottA]

The Eucharist is either Jesus or Evil
The Eucharist is either Jesus or mere bread and wine.

If the Eucharist is Jesus, everyone should be at Mass, worshipping Our Lord. If the Eucharist is Jesus, there should be no such thing as Protestantism, Mormonism, Islam, atheism, etc. But if the Eucharist isn’t Jesus, then for two thousand years, the would-be followers of Jesus Christ were actually idolaters. If that’s the case, nobody should be Catholic.

So those are the stakes. Everyone who encountered Jesus of Nazareth was faced with a crucial question: is this God, in some mysterious guise, or not? The early Christians called this the “aut Deus aut malus homo” (“either God or a bad man”). Everyone encountering the Eucharist is faced with the same question: either God or idolatry.

And of course, if the Eucharist is pagan idolatry, it’s demonic. As 1 Corinthians 10:20 says, “what pagans sacrifice they offer to demons and not to God.”

The whole world hangs on this point: is the Eucharist Jesus or an idol? Is the Sacrifice of the Mass being offered to God, or to demons?

Satan Hates the Eucharist
The satanic Black Mass is a ritual inversion (and mockery) of the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass performed by Satanists. Now, there are two types of Satanists: “LaVey Satanists,” and “theological Satanists.” LaVey Satanists atheists who don’t believe in Satan, and use “Satanism” as a tool to harass and provoke Christians (unlike“theological Satanists,” who believe in Satan and worship him). But whether the practitioners are playing at the occult, or serious, there’s no question that they’re tapping into some seriously dark spiritual forces. Satan is at work here.

And it worth pointing out that when Satanists (of both kind) want to mock a religious ritual, you can bet that it’s going to be the Holy Sacrifice of the Mass that they target. How often do you hear about Muslim or Hindu or Jewish (or even Protestant) services being subjected to such intense Satanic mockery?

Nor is this Satanic targeting of the Mass anything new. As far back as the fourth century, St. Epiphanius of Salamis described a sect of Gnosticism performing a perverted mockery of Mass. I won’t go into the details, but it was graphic enough that the members of this sect became known as “Borborians” (“filthy ones”).

Satan Doesn’t Drive Out Satan
So the Eucharist is either Jesus or evil (since if it’s not Jesus, it’s idolatry) and since the devil hates the Eucharist, we can cross “evil” off the list.

For some additional Biblical support, consider Matthew 12.22-28:

“Then a blind and dumb demoniac was brought to him, and he healed him, so that the dumb man spoke and saw. And all the people were amazed, and said, “Can this be the Son of David?” But when the Pharisees heard it they said, “It is only by Be-el′zebul, the prince of demons, that this man casts out demons.”

“Knowing their thoughts, he said to them, “Every kingdom divided against itself is laid waste, and no city or house divided against itself will stand; and if Satan casts out Satan, he is divided against himself; how then will his kingdom stand? And if I cast out demons by Be-el′zebul, by whom do your sons cast them out? Therefore they shall be your judges. But if it is by the Spirit of God that I cast out demons, then the kingdom of God has come upon you.”

This passage is important: it shows, for example, that Catholic exorcists are operating by the Spirit of God when they drive out demons. But it also means that if Satan hates the Mass, we can be sure that the Mass isn’t evil.

Of course, if the Mass isn’t demonic, if it isn’t idolatry, that really only leaves one option: that the Eucharist is Jesus Christ, and that the Sacrifice of the Mass is presenting Jesus to the Father. This (and as far as I can tell, this alone), accounts for the Satanic mockery.

The Target of Satan
Even if the only thing you knew about Catholicism was that its central form of worship, the Mass, was the target of Satanic ire, you would already have good reason to believe that Catholicism was the true religion.

But taken with all of the other evidence for the truth that the Eucharist is Jesus, that the Mass is a Sacrifice instituted by God, and that the Catholic Church is the Church founded by Christ, Satan is just one more (unwitting) witness for the truth of Jesus Christ and His Church.
How the Satanic Black Mass Proves the Truth of Catholicism | ChurchPOP


You think you are mocking BofL "defenses", and you think you are mocking Catholicism. You are not. You are mocking Jesus Christ.

"Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do."

Indeed.

You haven't understood the least of what I have said, but have obviously defaulted to your own defensive position as if I were against the Catholics - but I am not. Nor have I said the practice of taking communion elements is idolatry. On the contrary, I too take the elements. But you misunderstand.

It is not idolatry unless it is taken as idolatry...i.e., as if the elements were gods. For this we have been warned.

But just as when Jesus took the bread and passed the wine, and they were not actually Him, but were objects to be understood as parable and spiritual teaching - none of the apostles stopped following Jesus and began to eat and drink, saying "This is the Lord." No, but some of the church fathers began to do just that - the very same who came to revere Peter over Jesus' explanation of how He would build His church by the same means which Peter came to know that Jesus was the Christ - which was, as He said, by spiritual revelation from the Father. Which is not anti-Catholic either, but Catholics being anti-Christ, and anti-Father, and anti-Holy Spirit.

But no, we "as often as we do it", are to do it for the same reason that Christ first did it: to demonstrate by example, that His body was broken and His blood shed for us. Which we partake of once (in reality)...but continue to do by example until the end, as a witness to His having come in the flesh - not that the elements are His flesh, which makes the whole matter a mockery.

And for the same reason many revere the water of baptism as more than an object for demonstrating a spiritual example and truth, as if the waters below were the waters above. Genesis 1:7 Which, they are not.

 

[epostle]

You haven't understood the least of what I have said, but have obviously defaulted to your own defensive position as if I were against the Catholics - but I am not. Nor have I said the practice of taking communion elements is idolatry. On the contrary, I too take the elements. But you misunderstand.

It is not idolatry unless it is taken as idolatry...i.e., as if the elements were gods. For this we have been warned.

But just as when Jesus took the bread and passed the wine, and they were not actually Him, but were objects to be understood as parable and spiritual teaching - none of the apostles stopped following Jesus and began to eat and drink, saying "This is the Lord." No, but some of the church fathers began to do just that - the very same who came to revere Peter over Jesus' explanation of how He would build His church by the same means which Peter came to know that Jesus was the Christ - which was, as He said, by spiritual revelation from the Father. Which is not anti-Catholic either, but Catholics being anti-Christ, and anti-Father, and anti-Holy Spirit.

But no, we "as often as we do it", are to do it for the same reason that Christ first did it: to demonstrate by example, that His body was broken and His blood shed for us. Which we partake of once (in reality)...but continue to do by example until the end, as a witness to His having come in the flesh - not that the elements are His flesh, which makes the whole matter a mockery.

And for the same reason many revere the water of baptism as more than an object for demonstrating a spiritual example and truth, as if the waters below were the waters above. Genesis 1:7 Which, they are not.

The difference between your mockery of the Eucharist and the Satanists mockery is profound, and so are the similarities. Your anti-Catholicism is based on ignorance and blind prejudice. And of course, sheer stupidity. Your Gnosticism has been exposed before. You glean your understanding of Catholicism from hate cults, that's why you haven't a clue. And you can't just leave us alone. Your insults are against a card board caricature of a church you guys have dreamed up. It doesn't exist.

 

[BreadOfLife]

So...we both know that idolaters are not getting away with anything. Good.

But there are idolaters, and then there are idolaters - the one is blind, while the other sees. But Christ has come for the "recovery of sight to the blind."

But the point is...the warnings were not just for some, not just for those outside. Yet, you have not taken heed, but have believed well beyond what the scriptures say. Your last defense is the interpretations, teachings, and traditions of fallible men.

Once AGAIN, you're dodging the issue.

YOU need to decide whether or not the ECFs were Idolators who led millions of Christians astray with their "doctrines of devils" for their belief in the Real Presence - or whether they were teaching the correct Gospel message.
You keep pointing your finger back at ME, but THEY were the Bishops - the leaders - who led the Church after the Apostles.

So - were the ECFs wrong to teach about the Real Presence in the Eucharist - or were they simply teaching what had been passed on to them by Jesus and the Apostles??
This is a question that ALL Protestants need to ask themselves . . .

 

[ScottA]

The difference between your mockery of the Eucharist and the Satanists mockery is profound, and so are the similarities. Your anti-Catholicism is based on ignorance and blind prejudice. And of course, sheer stupidity. Your Gnosticism has been exposed before. You glean your understanding of Catholicism from hate cults, that's why you haven't a clue. And you can't just leave us alone. Your insults are against a card board caricature of a church you guys have dreamed up. It doesn't exist.

You are not listening, you call me names I would have to look up to even know what you are calling me, you accuse me of affiliations I do not have, you mock my knowledge which has only One source, and now you say the only church does not exist.

God knows, and so will you.

 

[ScottA]

Once AGAIN, you're dodging the issue.

YOU need to decide whether or not the ECFs were Idolators who led millions of Christians astray with their "doctrines of devils" for their belief in the Real Presence - or whether they were teaching the correct Gospel message.
You keep pointing your finger back at ME, but THEY were the Bishops - the leaders - who led the Church after the Apostles.

So - were the ECFs wrong to teach about the Real Presence in the Eucharist - or were they simply teaching what had been passed on to them by Jesus and the Apostles??
This is a question that ALL Protestants need to ask themselves . . .

I answered it already...

As I said, some were and some were not. Read it again.

 

[BreadOfLife]

I answered it already...

As I said, some were and some were not. Read it again.

No - YOU claimed that the ones who were victims of invincible ignorance might have a way out be cause they "knew not".
I'm NOT talking about the average followers - but the TEACHERS.

The ECFs were ALL the early LEADERS of the Church. they were the Bishops and Presbyters. As I showed you - with Scripture - They are held to a HIGHER standard than the average believer.

NOW - are they guilty of teaching "doctrines of devils" by their belief and practice in the Real Presence in the Eucharist??
This should be a no-brainer for you and EVERY Protestant.

 

[ScottA]

No - YOU claimed that the ones who were victims of invincible ignorance might have a way out be cause they "knew not".
I'm NOT talking about the average followers - but the TEACHERS.

The ECFs were ALL the early LEADERS of the Church. they were the Bishops and Presbyters. As I showed you - with Scripture - They are held to a HIGHER standard than the average believer.

NOW - are they guilty of teaching "doctrines of devils" by their belief and practice in the Real Presence in the Eucharist??
This should be a no-brainer for you and EVERY Protestant.

You are trying to define things by your own terms...and I have and am telling you there is both.

Read my lips: Your either/or terms are not applicable.

Some, indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils, while others have been the subjects of a type of blindness imposed by God upon all language, which they are not guilty of.

 

[BreadOfLife]

You are trying to define things by your own terms...and I have and am telling you there is both.

Read my lips: Your either/or terms are not applicable.

Some, indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils, while others have been the subjects of a type of blindness imposed by God upon all language, which they are not guilty of.

So, YOU are saying that SOME of the ECFs were blinded by God to teach doctrines of devils to millions of people - and that they will NOT be held accountable??
That makes God the Author of evil and a charlatan.

WHERE does the Bible teach this heretical fallacy??

 

[ScottA]

So, YOU are saying that SOME of the ECFs were blinded by God to teach doctrines of devils to millions of people - and that they will NOT be held accountable??
That makes God the Author of evil and a charlatan.

WHERE does the Bible teach this heretical fallacy??

No, you are twisting what I said. God created everything - does that make Him the Author of evil? But why are you surprised?

I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the Lord, do all these things.’ Isaiah 45:7

...Have you no knowledge of blind leaders of the blind? Are you such a fool to think there have been no charlatans in the church?

 

[mjrhealth]

No, you are twisting what I said. God created everything - does that make Him the Author of evil? But why are you surprised?

I form the light and create darkness,
I make peace and create calamity;
I, the Lord, do all these things.’ Isaiah 45:7

...Have you no knowledge of blind leaders of the blind? Are you such a fool to think there have been no charlatans in the church?

How long do we fight the devil... we are supposed to resist not fight... its hard...

 

[Ezra]

hurch of Christ believes that the "for" (Eis) means "for the purpose of" in Acts 2:38. So, Baptism then would be for the purpose of "remission of sins" and where we come in contact with the blood of Jesus, with their interpretation of Scripture. Baptism is also how one gets "into / puts on Christ" (Galatians 3:27). Also, baptism is what "adds you to the church". Faith/belief/repentance does not add you to the church unless you've been baptized.

Where we currently live, this doctrine is very popular. What are your thoughts on this matter? :)

water never saved any one without the shedding of Blood there is no remission of sins. in exodus when i see the Blood on the door post i will pass over you. no place has water saved baptism follows salvation :)

 

[epostle]

"

You are trying to define things by your own terms...and I have and am telling you there is both.

Read my lips: Your either/or terms are not applicable.

Some, indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils, while others have been the subjects of a type of blindness imposed by God upon all language, which they are not guilty of.

Some (meaning the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, or the consensus of the ECF)
"...indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils" WHICH ARE NEVER NAMED.
Since when does God impose blindness? That looks like a false man made doctrine to me.
"False Catholic doctrines" are often asserted by anti-Catholics. No examples, no context, no explanation. It's a generalization that reeks of bigotry.

 

[mjrhealth]

"
Some (meaning the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, or the consensus of the ECF)
"...indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils" WHICH ARE NEVER NAMED.
Since when does God impose blindness? That looks like a false man made doctrine to me.
"False Catholic doctrines" are often asserted by anti-Catholics. No examples, no context, no explanation. It's a generalization that reeks of bigotry.

Something to do with this

Mar 7:6 He answered and said unto them, Well hath Esaias prophesied of you hypocrites, as it is written, This people honoureth me with their lips, but their heart is far from me.
Mar 7:7 Howbeit in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men.
Mar 7:8 For laying aside the commandment of God, ye hold the tradition of men, as the washing of pots and cups: and many other such like things ye do.

nothing to do with anti any religion, just religion that stands in opposition to God which makes them all": anti Christ". and I do mean all religion.

Col 2:22 Which all are to perish with the using, after the commandments and doctrines of men?
Col 2:23 Which things have indeed a shew of wisdom in will worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body; not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh.

Ps did I mention your church has no authority of any one, cept those who "choose" to give it authority over them. Teh only Authority e are supposed to have over us is Christ.

 

[ScottA]

"
Some (meaning the teaching authority of the Catholic Church, or the consensus of the ECF)
"...indeed have knowingly taught doctrines of devils" WHICH ARE NEVER NAMED.
Since when does God impose blindness? That looks like a false man made doctrine to me.
"False Catholic doctrines" are often asserted by anti-Catholics. No examples, no context, no explanation. It's a generalization that reeks of bigotry.

Apparently you do not know the scriptures:

Romans 11:25
For I do not desire, brethren, that you should be ignorant of this mystery, lest you should be wise in your own opinion, that blindness in part has happened to Israel until the fullness of the Gentiles has come in.